60D & Lenses [CR1]
December 21st, 2009 Posted in Canon 60D, Canon Lenses
60D Specs
Someone claiming to be testing a new APS-C camera from Canon wrote in yesterday.
What are they testing?
Specs
18mp APS-C
6.3fps
Single Processor (DIGIC V?)
Looks like a 50D, but has a dedicated video button
1080p Video (no info on framerates)
Less weathersealing than the 7D
Lenses
The same person claims to also be testing the 24-70 f/2.8L II IS and a 100-200 f/2L IS.
The 200 f/2L IS is pretty big (and a personal favorite), how big would a zoom version be?
cr
December 21st, 2009 at 8:03 am
100-200 f/2 would rock, but yes might be a beast
Reply
Scott Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:56 pm
Well the Canon 200mm 2.0 IS is $5300 less $500 savings for a $4800 net at B&H and weights 5.6 lbs.
So a 100-200 f/2 IS has got to be more expensive and weight more.
How about just a 135 1.8 IS instead.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:10 am
how about a 135mm 1.4
Reply
Sebastian Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:07 pm
how about a 135mm 1.0
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:11 pm
That would be huge
Reply
J-Man Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:31 pm
I don’t think that is even possible,
50 1.0 & 85 1.2 max out the EF mount.
I’d have to guess that 100 1.4 & 135 1.6 & 150 1.8 & 200 2.0 are the fastest we could get.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:58 pm
I have a 200mm 1.8
Reply
Ted Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 7:21 am
What does “max out the EF mount” mean?
Reply
Brandon Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 12:17 pm
I think he means the limitation of the diameter of the EF mount. You can only get so much light into the lens. For example, to maximize light efficiency, the 50mm 1.2L has the electrical contacts integrated into the glass. There’s simply no more room.
Reply
Tom Reply:
February 3rd, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Thats not the maximum you could get!
The diameter of aperture the 50mm 1:1,0 is 50mm.
The diameter of aperture the 85/1,2 is theoretical 70mm. (85* (1:1,2)=70.8) “1:1,2″ gives you the proportion of “aperture : focal length”
The diameter of aperture the 200/2.0 is t. 100mm.
The diameter of aperture the 400/2.8 is t. 142mm.
It’s simply the diameter of the front Element that counts.
See the front element as a “collecting lens” that concentrate the light to a smaller area.
conclusion: a 135mm 1:1.0 would be possible with the EF mount (the front element must be at least 135mm in diameter.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 8:10 am
Is it CR1,2 or 3 ?
especially for lenses :P
Reply
Andy Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:10 am
Seriously, do you think Canon would have one person/organization testing three pre-release products all at the same time? It’s even more dubious when you consider that it’s highly unlikely that someone who could both use (and afford!) a 100-200mm f/2 would use it with a 60D. Also, they say “24-70 f/2.8L II IS” but since this would be the first version with IS why would there be any need for the “II”?
Personally, I’m filing this one under CR-HaHa!
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:50 am
Yep
Reply
GL2 Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Ditto.
Reply
MT Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:04 pm
the II designation would make sense, as hopefully they changed some things (presumably for the better) other than just throwing in IS.
whether this guy is telling the truth is one thing, but i don’t see why canon wouldn’t use the II designation to show all current owners this is a NEWER lens and try to get them to buy it all over again.
Reply
DeeWee Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:41 pm
As opposed to all the other lenses which Canon updated with IS and didn’t receive the II designation, right?
Surely people must think they are the same as the old non-IS versions and simply refuse to buy them…
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:43 pm
what non-IS lenses went to II with IS? I think you’re mistaken.
Reply
DeeWee Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:50 pm
And I think you’re misunderstanding my post ;)
I am saing there is NO lens which got the IS and the II marker after upgrade, you just need to read it in the context of the post I was replying to.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Ah! Then we agree
Reply
Wayne Reply:
December 30th, 2009 at 7:28 am
I also wondered about this.
I’d LOVE one though, like NOW! PLEASE!
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 8:13 am
pics or it didn’t happen.
Reply
Charles Bronson Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:40 am
Pretty much.
Reply
Urkel Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:45 pm
The biggest selling point for the 60D for me would be an articulating screen. For non-pros then these fixed screens make video extremely awkward.
Oh, and SD. Cmon canon.
Reply
Ugg Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 3:06 pm
SD is fine, as long as there’s a CF slot too.
Reply
John.B Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 7:06 pm
I hate how sloooooowwwwww SD/SDHC cards are… Hopefully they stick with CF cards for the 60D.
Reply
J-Man Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:35 pm
I’m waiting for CFast & SDXC cards to show up.
Reply
MT Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:06 pm
no joke. they already have a camera, obviously. how tough would it be to send in a simple pic?
but if these people are lying, why do they bother wasting their time?
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 8:15 am
Serious question: what would people use a 100-200 f/2 for? Maybe I lack imagination.
A 200-500 f/2.8-4, on the other hand, would be EXTREMELY useful.
Reply
Bob Howland Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:26 am
Is the 100-200 the first in a series? Can we look forward to a 150-300 f/2.8, 250-500 f/4 and 400-800 f/5.6? If I can’t have my 200-500, I’d settle for the 250-500.
Reply
kgirls Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:50 am
I would love a 100-200 f/2.o for indoor sports but I am not sure sure the person saying this rumor is not smoking something. Would love for it to be true though. Would be one bad a$$ lens (emphasis on the $$).
Reply
Bob Howland Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:01 am
I use an 85 f/1.8 and 135 f/2 to shoot indoor sports, but the 100-200 would have to weigh a bunch, certainly more than the 200 f/2 prime, which I don’t own, and probably more than my 300 f/2.8, which I never handhold. (A torn rotator cuff doesn’t help matters.)
Reply
backshot especiale Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Sports photography is gay like the volleyball scene in Top Gun.
Reply
lol Reply:
December 24th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
rofl
Reply
Ugg Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Arena sports would be the obvious use..
Reply
backshot especiale Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Sports photography is gay like ice man to goose.
Reply
lol Reply:
December 24th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
lol again
Reply
Scott Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Here’s the Sigma 200-500 f/2.8. It weights 34 lbs and is over $30,000 US.
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3349&navigator=3
So are you really going to buy a “Canon 200-500 f/2.8-4, on the other hand, would be EXTREMELY useful”?
Reply
Jim Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 6:09 pm
A 250-500 f/4 or a 200-400 f/4 would at least be “affordable” (Nikon’s 200-400 f/4 at B&H is $6,100) and you would actually be able to carry it.
Reply
Bob Howland Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 8:10 pm
200-500 f/2.8-4 is intended to mean f/2.8 at 200mm and f/4 at 500mm, with a 125mm nominal front element, same as the 500 f/4. I own a 100-400 and camera bodies handle the variable aperture just fine.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:31 pm
I would love a 200-400 2.8
Reply
Tom Reply:
February 3rd, 2010 at 1:36 pm
go get the 200-500 mm F2,8 EX DG APO from sigma!
It’s a bargain for only 25 Grand! And only 16Kg.
;-)
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 8:28 am
i want the 24-70 IS !!
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 8:42 am
100-200 f2 will be the same purpose as 70-200 2.8 L IS except F2 will be amazing at 200mm esp for wedding and concert
Reply
Michal Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:08 am
If you want 200mm f/2 it already exists so just buy it. 100-200 f/2 is one of the most unrealistic lens ever, simply not gonna happen.
Reply
gabe Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:36 am
+infinite
Reply
max Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 3:52 pm
or maybe it will happen, but it will be massive!!!!
Reply
Enche Tjin Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 6:20 pm
It won’t happen, why you want to make that awkward lens, the size and price will be enormous. 100-400mm is more likely but not f2..
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 8:46 am
Interesting Camera spec, take the 7d sensor and match it to the 50D fps rate. Add video as thats mandatory and hence test out the digic V in a commercial camera with neither mass market or leading edge sales.
Shame this sensor move infers the same ISO of 12800 and not higher.
So this ‘CR1′ noted camera sits below the 7D in fps and environmental sealing, but above the 50D in terms of MP and Movie.
Oh i hope its soon and one becomes mine as my 400D needs to relax after christmas.
I doubt i’d be testing the 100-200 on 1.6 crop camera though.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:59 am
lol there’s no way it’s gonna be so close in specs to the 7D for $500 less
Reply
MT Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:08 pm
it could happen
remove:
- body quality
- second processor (for speed)
- pentaprism for 100% coverage
give them the same sensor as the 7d as an upgrade to handle the concerns about noise and improved video and a new digic version and it could be an excuse to release a new version.
who knows if its true, but it sounds plausible.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:08 pm
The 50D is already 6.3 FPS, you think they’re gonna make it slower in the 60D? I don’t think so. 1.7 FPS is not much of difference between the 50D and 7D, if the 60D has the same sensor it just makes no marketing sense at all at this point. Maybe if they wait until 2011 I could see it as possible. I think these 60D fantasy specs are just to piss off the megapixel bashers in forums and nothing more.
Reply
MT Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:34 am
what a useful way for somebody to spend their christmas holiday! the world of photography rumors is a weird place!
Reply
Kim Sinton Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Oh yes it could! Look what the 5d Mark 2 did to the 1ds Mark 3. The $8000 1ds Mark three had been out less than a year when Canon decides it has to compete with Sony and releases a camera with the same mega pixels, better low light noise + 1080p video for $2800.
1ds Mark 3 owners are still trying to slavage their dignity by saying the 1ds Mark 3 i s a work horse, but c’mon.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:02 pm
You must not have a 1Ds3 or you would not be making such a comparison, and while I love my 5D2, the extra money difference is quite evident, especially if you are shooting any action the 1Ds3’s AF and actual 5 FPS really blow the 5D2’s AF/FPS away (and don’t tell me the 5D2 is 3.9 FPS, it’s more like 2.5 FPS in servo). These specs between this fantasy 60D seem way too close to the 7D, 1.7 FPS difference and some weather sealing separate them by $500? I don’t think so. I think we’ll see a 15 MP 720p 60D, maybe 1080p.
Reply
jo Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:27 pm
well, remember that the 7D got a new AF system too, and nobody has claimed that this 60D will inherit that as well -which means that there is a significant difference between the AF/FPS specs in the 7D and this suggested 60D..
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:21 am
I dont think that is enough of a difference. Both 18 MP, both 1080p video, only 1.7 FPS difference and the AF on the 50D is plenty good for it’s 6.3 FPS so where’s the big 7D advantage to go from $1200 to $1700? Maybe if they wait another year for 2011 so the 7D Mark II is on the horizon it would make some sense.
Reply
jo Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 3:27 pm
so you assume that the 60D also will inherit the 7D’s large viewfinder, the same new metering system, the wireless transmitters, the same amount of weathersealing, the same general build quality and design and the new electronic level?
well I don’t (and neither does the person who created this rumor) and therefor I also think there’s more than enough difference..
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 3:51 pm
I’ve shot with my 50D and a friend’s 7D and I couldn’t tell any significant build quality difference. I’d expect to see a new metering system & leveling gimmic in the 60D, but not the same processor as the 7D, which I think is purely wishful thinking for those who want a 7D at a 50D price. I think it will be an improved 50D with video, not a 7D in a less weather sealed body. You have your view, I have mine. We’ll see who is right in time.
Reply
jo Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:43 pm
but.. maybe I missed something, but you say you expect these specs and yet you argue that other’s less optimistic expectations are too close to the 7D to be realistic?
what I expect is just a 50D upgraded with the 7D sensor at 18MP (I hope for only 15 though), video and possibly a new (single) digic v processor.. one more feature from the 7D would be nice, but I dont expect it..
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:35 pm
I’m saying it’s not gonna have the 7D sensor. I think it will be an improved 50D with video, 15 MP, improved noise/low light ISO, maybe better metering, maybe have the leveling gimmic, same AF and FPS as 50D.
Reply
jo Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 6:11 am
alright, well we’ll see.. I think they will have to use the 7D sensor to be able to improve low-light performance further from the 50D though + it would make sense if they wanted to make more money of that sensor, than just what they get from the 7D-sales..
David Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:21 am
it could have a new 15 MP sensor with improvements like the 7D has, I just don’t believe Canon marketing will launch another fast 18 MP APS-C camera at $500 less then the 7D at this point.
jo Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 12:02 pm
true.. but as said earlier, I hope for 15MP.. I just don’t expect it for some reason…
December 21st, 2009 at 8:50 am
I’d sign up for a 200-500 2.8-4 tomorrow.
Reply
canonshark Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Do you have $15K to spare?
Reply
DeeWee Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Well, he didn’t say he would buy it…
Reply
Bob Howland Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 8:21 pm
The Nikon 200-400 f/4 is $6100 at B&H. I figure a 200-500 would cost a couple thousand more…and be worth every cent.
Reply
Michal Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:54 am
A couple thousand more? You are mistaken by an order of at least one magnitude, adding focal length AND improving maximum aperture would change the price close to exponentially, not linearly.
Reply
Bob Howland Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:54 am
I’m only improving maximum aperture to f/2.8 at 200mm (71mm aperture) and allowing it to go to f/4 at 500mm (125mm aperture). By your analysis, the 100-400 should cost less if it was a fixed f/5.6 maximum aperture than it does with an f/4.5-5.6 variable aperture. I see no reason why that should be so. Care to explain?
Reply
Michal Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:27 am
“I’m only improving maximum aperture to f/2.8 at 200mm (71mm aperture)”
Where did you get the idea that the amount of glass needed in a lens can be simply calculated by dividing the the focal length by aperture? This is much more complex than that, changing the focal length (especially of zoom lenses) and their maximum aperture is not just a question of up-scaling the existing optical arrangement but most likely also introducing additional elements. It also makes a huge difference what apertures are getting “upgraded”, you need much more glass if you were to improve max aperture from 2.8 to 2.0.
“By your analysis, the 100-400 should cost less if it was a fixed f/5.6 maximum aperture than it does with an f/4.5-5.6 variable aperture. I see no reason why that should be so. Care to explain?”
I have said no such thing, I mentioned improving maximum aperture at all focal lengths, in your hypothetical example constant aperture 100-400 f/4.5 would be MUCH more expensive than the real and existing f/4.5-5.6. Adding constant aperture in zoom lenses also additional complexities to the equation.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:25 am
Show us the actual cost breakdowns for Canon’s prodcution of lenses or stop misleading people by posing your guesses as fact.
Reply
Michal Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:38 pm
50mm 1.8 – $90
50mm 1.4 – $360 – FOUR times more expensive than 1.8 with the difference less than 1/2 stop
50mm 1.2 – $1600 – FOUR times more expensive than 1.6 with the difference of less than 1/2 stop
The price difference of just one stop is whopping 16 times.
Even if we have to slightly adjust the original starting price of 1.8 which has a very cheap construction the difference between 1.4 and 1.2 is still very telling, isn’t it? And we are talking about very simple non-zoom lens that have relatively few elements.
How expensive would it be to increase the 2.8 aperture of a telephoto zoom lens to 2.0? Quite prohibitive if possible at all
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:44 pm
As you now point out, lens construction makes a huge difference. They did not have to make the 50mm 1.4 heavier and beefier and it would be a much less expensive lens had they built it with the construction quality of the 1.8, right? So you can’t just claim you know how much a lens will cost unless you know to what level of construction they are going to build it to. Not that it matters, if they made it would probably be a 2.8 and compete with the Sigma lens, but this whole rumor is CR1 fantasy land.
Reply
Michal Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:50 pm
Where did i say “huge”?
It makes SOME difference, not a huge one, the older version of 1.8 was only slightly more expensive, even if it’s twice as expensive factoring that into the equation still makes the lens that’s one one stop faster at least 10 times more expensive.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:05 pm
$90 vs. $360 may not be a huge difference to you, but it is to me. So break it down mr. know it all, show me the materials and production costs for plastic 1.8 lens construction vs. the 1.4’s construction. You don’t get to just quote lens prices without a break down of the materials and production costs, with an evalution of what the 1.4 would actually cost if it made to the 1.8 construction standards.
December 21st, 2009 at 8:51 am
so, is it too much of speculation with this porbable 60D specs given, if I take a guess? 7D MkII will be 21 MP, 2x Digic V, ISO 100-6400, 12800 (H1) 25600 (H2)? anyone?
Reply
Ugg Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:35 am
Yeah, unfortunately the pixel-race continues – well between Pentax and Canon anyways.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 11:01 am
Pentax? What pixel race are they in exactly? Maybe you mean Sony?
Reply
Ugg Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 3:12 pm
The K7 is 15MP on an APS-C crop, but yeah Sony as well.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:14 pm
yeah, that’s their top MP camera, where Nikon and Sony are at 24 MP, Canon at 21 MP. Granted those are FF cameras, but still, if Pentax is trying to be in a MP race they are losing big time.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 9:02 am
most realistic 60D speculation I’ve seen so far.. this is pretty much what I’ve been expecting from a 60D after the 7D was announced..
Reply
spam Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:58 am
Agree, this would be the obvious spec for 60D, except for Digic V which is possible, but unlikely that soon after 7D.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 9:11 am
Nikon D400 – canon 7dmkIII juj 2011 – propS:
40 mp – 0.5 EV
maxcam 666000 – digic 6
Burst Mode with afservo: 28 fps
ISO 30 – 300000
Movie – mode: 2300G at 200 fps
160-point AF Points
cpu AMD atom xx7.5Ghz
led Live view for finder
6 histogram of bkt modes
HAHAHA
Reply
Peter Hauri Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:29 am
;-)) okay, I’ll save up for that one…regards and merry christmas
Reply
afrank99 Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:36 am
Was this supposed to be funny?
Reply
Peter Hauri Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:25 am
what else…it’s cameras only…I’d rather go for an 18 MP, but taken with some humor one won’t be so badly surprised, as the MP race is on
Reply
help Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 12:45 pm
160 point AF is very unrealistic!
Reply
Pure Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:02 pm
If I had to dream, I’d love the 60D to shoot 720p, 1080p, 2k or 3k resolution videos at maybe around 50-300fps. Any more than that, and you’re being greedy.
Oh, and make that with an iso range of 10-128000. And no jello effect.
Reply
J-Man Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Come on, you can do better than that,
4k video from a $1000 body. :-)
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 9:15 am
Wondering how heavy would the 24-70 II IS would be? I have been debating with 24-70 non IS and 24-105 IS for like a month. Maybe I should wait. Does anyone know when the 24-70IS would come out?
Reply
Wait Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:34 am
Just wait. If you like the new 24-70 (IS) great, if not you could pick up a used 24-70 (non-IS) for cheap from an upgrader.
Reply
Connie Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:09 am
Great point!! Thanks.
Reply
Ugg Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:19 pm
If you do buy used, make sure you try it out first if possible, as there are definitely soft copies out there.
Reply
Connie Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Yea, I heard there are a lot soft copies of this lens!
Reply
Erik Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 7:37 pm
That’s exactly what I’m doing – just waiting on the sidelines until the new lens comes out. I figure the price for the non-IS lens will drop, or at least provide a lot of lenses for sale.
Reply
MT Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:09 pm
the IS doesn’t add significant weight.
Reply
Connie Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:40 pm
ooo… great! The max I can hold a camera gear probably around 5lbs.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 9:32 am
how about 70-200mm f2.8L is MKII?
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 9:59 am
Nope – don’t believe it. 100-200 f/2 would be too big, and an IS version of 24-70 would be a “24-70 f/2.8L IS”, and not “II IS”.
Reply
Trondster Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:05 am
The existing 200mm f/2.9L IS is a 2,520g (5.6lbs) beast – a zoom with the same aperture would be enormous, approaching sigzilla dimensions..
Reply
Trondster Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:05 am
f/2.0, even.
Reply
Grummbeerbauer Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:08 am
I second the notion — the bullcrap about a 100-200 f2 pretty much eliminates any credibility this particular source might have.
Reply
J-Man Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:11 am
they could release a 24-70 f2.8L II IS if they release a non IS at the same time.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 10:01 am
does not sound too logical for a 100-200 f2 IS L…
it really gonna costs a bomb! and eat into the legendary 70-200 IS L’s market share too i think!
70-200 IS MK2 sounds logical though!
Reply
max Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 3:56 pm
it will most probably cost like 10 grand!! so i dont think it will eat into the 70-200 realm… and if it does, its because its specs are sooooo much better!
100-200 f/2 who wouldnt want that?
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 10:06 am
I think the 100-200/2 is a hoax. Canon has already a good 70-210/2.8 L IS USM. The 200/2 L IS USM (prime) costs 5.000 EUR. So a 100-200/2 L IS USM would get a price tag of around 10.000 EUR. For a medium tele zoom? Never! I don’t see a market for a 100-200/2. And nobody else (Nikon, Sony, Pentax..) has a medium Telezoom with f2.0. With good reasons. If you need 200/2, then you should take the 200/2 L IS USM.
Reply
Yitzy Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Olympus has a 35-100 f2.0 that when on a FT/MFT body its like a 70-200 f2.0!
:p
*but i agree that a canon 100-200L f2 it a hoax
(maybe maybe EF-S….not L)
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:06 pm
100-200mm 2.0 on an 7D would be a 160-320mm 2.0, but it would have to be one massive lens. EF-S, well that would definately give some juice to that mount and make the 7D even more attractive.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 10:06 am
Not again please… typical baseless, imaginary fanboi rumour. Honestly – less is better, I’d rather read something that has some basis updated infrequently than this sort of stuff updated every couple of weeks.
Reply
MT Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:09 pm
why do people waste their time writing bogus reports?
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:15 pm
to piss off megapixel bashers who will whine and cry about too many megapixels
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 10:20 am
April 1st already :p ?
Reply
Jayce Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:27 am
yaya… :P
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 10:41 am
what the heck is the point of the 100-200/2 IS…. I call bull … there are way more useful lenses that could be added by Canon and this just seems like it have way to much overlap and it would be so expensive as to be a niche product… wish they put out a long tele that was lighter…. a 500/5.6L IS or even better a 600/5.6L IS …. the 600 could cost about the same as the 300/2.8L IS (same front glass) but would give you a lot more reach in still a relatively portable package… especially compared to the F4 teles.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 11:08 am
24-70mm II? The current one is razor sharp, shoots like a prime. How on earth can that be improved? Adding not-so-useful IS and increasing the price tag $500 (like with the new 100mm Macro) is not exactly an improvement. IS on a wider lens doesn’t add much, and if your subject is moving, it’s useless. If it cost $100 more I could see the justification, but $500-$600 more for that is just nuts. Get a 5D2, the full frame sensor allows you excellent image quality up to 1600 ISO. Ba Da Bing, there’s your extra two stops.
Reply
Ugg Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Razor sharp? You must have a good copy.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:17 pm
My 24-70 2.8 L is very sharp as well, I use it all the time on my 5D2 and 1Ds3.
Reply
heri Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:47 pm
the sigma or canon 50mm f1.4 leaves in the dust the 24-70mm.
It’s the most overrated canon lens ever, 3 lens out of 4 back or front-focuses
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:09 pm
please show us a source quote from Canon or some valid third party survey backing up your claim 3 out of 4 of them back or front focus, and forum quotes by whining annonymous users who probably don’t even own one do not count.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 11:21 am
I am hoping Canon will produce a 600mm f/4 DO lens. Their 400mm f/4 DO is great but needs a little bit more glass. Any lens can be improved on with an eye on the cost but the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 is a must for improvement. It is getting a bit aged.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:08 pm
The 100-400 L would be my top pick for an update. I use that lens all the time, more than my 70-200 L.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 11:43 am
The current 24-70 F2.8L Lens is not nearly as great as you think it is. The nikon 24-70 F2.8 blows it out of the water. That lens has much to be improved, both in sharpness and the fact the autofocus motor seems to always have back focusing issues. I’ve only ever seen one copy that didn’t have the problem.
Just keep into consideration the Nikon 24-70 F2.8 is way sharper, focuses faster and is smaller at the same time. So trust me there is room for this lens to be improved. I’m quite certain the lens will be completely different from the current version.
Reply
Ugg Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 4:27 pm
I’ve never been happy with my 24-70mm, even after calibration at Canon.
Reply
Justin Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Many of us crave an upgrade to the 24-70. IS would go a long way to helping with low light hand held shots. For stopping action in low light though you still need something faster than 2.8. I guess word on the beta street is that the 1D4 would do the job by pushing iso to 6400 or 12800 for relatively clean images. Still, how amazing would it be if they made it a 24-70 2.0 IS?? I would pick that lens up with a quickness.
Reply
heri Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:48 pm
I’ve settled by using a couple of primes
I would have been happy if I bought it at around $700
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 11:53 am
Still holding out for the 14-400 f/1.4
the 1.2 will be just a tad too heavy and IS will be too expensive. 100-200/2 is bogus
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:10 pm
I wouldn’t buy a 14-400 1.4, all the 4’s make it unlucky in Japan, now if it was 12-400mm 1.4 I would, lol
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Question: any way that the 100-200 f2 would be an EF-S lens? That would give the approximate same DOF as an f2.8 on FF, an EF-S f2 is not that hard to do, and would not be that big /expensive.
Reply
A J Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 12:19 pm
For a 100-200/2 you need a 100 mm front element, minimum size. Doesn’t matter if it’s crop or FF. As such I say a lens like this is extremely unlikely.
Crop equivalents of 70-200/4 and 70-200/2.8 would be roughly 55-135/2.8 and 55-135/2.0
I have a Tokina 55-135/2.8 and it’s exactly the same size as a Canon 70-200/4 non-IS.
If Canon ever made an EF-S 55-135/2.8 IS with ring-USM (essentially the 70-200/4 IS with built-in 1.4x compressor) I’d pay serious money to get it. Even more for a 2.0 of course. Portrait shooter’s dream lens for crop.
Reply
Etienne Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:02 pm
I have the tokina 50-135 as well, and I would love a Canon 50-135 2.8 IS (or an f2.0). They should be able to it for $1100 or so.
The 7D proves that Canon is serious about APS-C so I’d bet a Canon 50-135 f2.8 IS will come out some day.
Reply
A J Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Indeed. And let’s hope it’s black!
Reply
Etienne Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Yes, I’d prefer black as well, and L construction (that’s my only complaint with my 17-55 2.8IS, great lens, but charge another $100 and build it like an L lens).
(secretly hoping for f2.0 on the EFS 50-135, but then it wouldn’t be light and small anymore)
Reply
Paul Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:58 pm
+Eleventy one
Reply
jo Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:30 am
+1
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:40 pm
you are right! but maybe not 50-135…55-200 f2.8 IS alright for you? under USD $1100? =) but that’s not on the immediate schedule. we’ve got some primes to settle first. from what i know, EF-S primes will be next to go. we’re not about to let nikon and sigma provide better lenses than us. u guys like the sigma 30 f/1.4 DC? we’ve heard you. it’s been in our plans for real long, but there are too many other things to settle first.
Reply
Etienne Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 1:50 pm
55-200 f2.8 IS would be awesome, mated to the 7D would be a very respectable sports combo (and more). Make it L build quality, even if the price needs to be bumped up a bit. A lens like that would be reason enough to keep APS-C alongside FF in the kit.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Canon should just quit. What’s next 40 megapixel aps-c sensor that has worse image quality that G9. Too many pixels of poor quality.
Reply
roger767 Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 12:31 pm
its a rumour, but seeing what they did with the 7d it doesn’t bode well.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:11 pm
bring on MOAR MEGAPIXELS….woo hoo
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:35 pm
if canon quits i’d be out of job.
Reply
Mark Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 1:54 pm
haha, me too. i wish they would start making cameras people want instead of more megapixels though. i’d much rather have a canon d700 but with their glorious L series lenses. nikon primes fail, canon too many megapixel cameras fail.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Oh yeah, Canon doesn’t make any cameras people want. Not a one. Every photographer on the planet hates megapixels and wishes they had a 12 MP Nikon…
sure
Reply
backshot especiale Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:16 pm
hahahahaha
I wouldn’t mind an M9 though, not sure about a nikon, I reckon they’ll be gone by 2011
Reply
David Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:24 am
i’d love an M9 too!
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 12:18 pm
How about an EF-S 55-135 f/2?
Reply
roger767 Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 12:34 pm
EFs 55-135USM f2 with IS, Thats how you stay ahead of the competition. Stupid EFs ****** f3.5-5.6 lenses don’t cut it anymore.
Reply
Freeze_XJ Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:51 pm
that’s why we have an EF-S with f/2.8 :) Anyway, a 55-135 2.8 would be OK too… IS optional.
Reply
Charles Bronson Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Yeah, but only one fast EF-S lens is not enough. I’d definitely like to see something in the 55-135 f/2.8 range and some fast EF-S primes.
I’m still trying to figure out the point of the 18-135. For a little over $100 more you can get the 18-200. Seems pointless.
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:35 pm
the EF-S 15-85 is just the beginning. =) we hear you. but we need time too. its a big organization!
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:34 pm
if canon is capable of creating that at a price and size you can afford, we’ll do it.
Reply
Etienne Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:04 pm
I would love that lens, especially if they could make it smaller and lighter than the 70-200 2.8IS
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 12:54 pm
I pity the foo that think the 100-200 f/2 is a real lens. That garbage would be as heavy as 3 of my biggest gold chains. That’s just jibba jabba
Reply
MT Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:10 pm
post of the day.
Reply
backshot especiale Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:18 pm
I pitty the fool that wants tom cruise zooms.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 1:06 pm
D30 3MP
D60 6MP
10D 6MP
20D 8MP
30D 8MP
40D 10MP
50D 15MP
I think we can count on the 60D being single-digic-IV and 15mp. 18mp wouldn’t differentiate itsself enough from the 7D and would punish lower-end lenses even more than the 50D already does.
As for lenses:
– There are currently FOUR 70-200L zooms. Forget about another xx-200 zoom, especially an ultra-wide-aperture lens (the 200mm f/2L IS prime is already hugely expensive & heavy. A 50-135 is far more likely.
– The IS version of the 24-70 will be called “24-70 f/2.8L IS”.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 1:18 pm
yeah, no reason to spec the 60D almost the same as the 7D, it’ll be a minor update with video added, only question is will it be 720p or full 1080 30p.
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:33 pm
60D will have 18mp. it may have 18mp but the ISO will remain @ 3200 max. there are a lot to differentiate, you do not have to worry. don’t worry abt the efs lenses too. noticed how quickly the 17-85 was replaced? =) it’s just the beginning.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:00 pm
I don’t agree with your view on the 60D
Reply
heri Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:51 pm
I’d never buy a 18MP 50D
wish canon makes it 12MP
Reply
KrisZ Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Maybe if we are lucky the 60D will be a jump backwards in MP with more focus on decreasing noise. Oh wait…this is Canon we are talking about.
One day they will abandon the MP race, hopefully it is sooner rather than later.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Lots of drinking during the holidays….
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 1:14 pm
What a good laugh. Call this a CR0.
As said before no 60D is foreseen in the 1st half of 2010.
We are on a 24/30 month life cycle for the xxD series depending upon what Nikon or Sony is going to release.
Reply
MT Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:11 pm
hahahahha thanks for the “official” word.
Reply
Victor Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Probably not, but not far from the truth.
I also think we will not see 60D before end of summer or early 2011. There is no need to replace 50D at this moment.
7D is already struggling to get its place in the market.
Reply
David Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:21 pm
lol The 7D is struggling? Selling very well from what I hear. I could see a minor update to add video on the 60D though.
Reply
gurbally Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 10:29 pm
7D struggling? Its sales are booming.
Reply
Gusto Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 1:28 am
You are talking rubbish. It is selling MUCH better than the original D300.
As a matter of fact, when the numbers for market shares are released early next year, you’ll see what I mean. The overwhelming popularity of the m4/3 market seems to have the largest impact on Nikon than on the rest of the competition.
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:30 pm
1) 7D sales are high even in this recession. In Japan the 7D is more expensive than it is in the US, but we’ve got people buying it nonetheless.
2) 60D will come out next year. Nikon will introduce a replacement for the D90 and Canon will react to that.
3) who are you to tell people we are on a 24/30 month cycle when that isn’t true?
Reply
Laura Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Who are you with no inside information?
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:01 pm
+1000000
Reply
Jitteringjr Reply:
January 3rd, 2010 at 1:20 pm
As nice as it would be to have a Canon rep here, I hope you are full of it. I want a xxD with video now not next year. I have an XT and the AF sucks and I have been waiting to replace it since the 5d2 came out. Since then you put video on even a rebel and no 60D. Come on!
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Only 18 Megapixels? Surely Canon can shoe horn another few more in that APS-C with a Digic V to erase away the noise.
Reply
Ugg Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 3:08 pm
+1BILLION!!!
We need more MP!
Reply
Michal Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:10 am
Assuming that the noise levels and dynamic range will remain close to the current levels than you are right, we do. Repeat with me – pixels are good, more pixels are better. The limiting factor is many (if not most of the cases) is the lens, basically the sensor technology has pushed the current glass to the limits, those high density sensors need really good quality lens. Read for yourself – http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/50d.shtml
Reply
hahah Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:23 am
LOL
The perfect Canon prosumer customer.
Reply
Michal Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:26 am
Thank you very much for your insightful and interesting comment that has added so much to this discussion. Can I ask you to present your professional and scientific achievements so we can compare them to those of the above author?
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:32 am
Why don’t you do the same
Reply
Michal Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Haven’t you read the article David?
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:55 pm
I read it a long time ago. They keep improving lenses not just cameras, so what? Should companies stop making better cameras and lenses to hold some sort of status quo? I don’t think so. The idea you can expect all your glass to always be good enough is just silly.
Reply
hahah Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:14 pm
I have a better idea Michal: why don’t you get this tattooed across your forehead “Repeat with me – pixels are good, more pixels are better.”
Maybe you could get a job shilling for Canon professionally, rather than just carrying water for them for free.
Reply
Inst Reply:
December 26th, 2009 at 1:41 am
Absolutely not! If you see what happened with the 7D, you’ll know that 18mp is the most we’ll ever see in an APS-C sensor using the Bayer technology. If you want to go higher, you’ll need Foveon-style sensors with pixels stacked on top of each other. And even at 18mp, the compromises made against general-purpose photography are such that 18mp is only workable for a specialist photojournalist camera.
If Canon is smart, they’ll either switch to Foveon or they’ll just work on improving dynamic range, color rendition, and low-noise high-iso.
The alternative, of course, would be to go up to APS-H on the 60D. Doing so would cut into Canon’s profits from producing a larger sensor for a lower-priced camera, as well as ruining the value of EF-S sensors; and where would the 7D be then?
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:28 pm
lol…18mp…nothing more for 60D. =)
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 2:39 pm
If it is true Canon are to release the 100-200 f2L IS lens there would be less of a reason for a 70-200 f2.8L IS replacement.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 3:00 pm
18MP…I have been hoping for the 60D to stay at 15MP and get some the “new” 7D technology. Perhaps Canon’s plan is to put the (basic) 7D sensor into the 60D the same way the T1i inherited the (basic) sensor from the 50D. If that is the case, the 60D may have improved image quality over the 7D. Now if they just include the sensor/AF combination to improve the AF from the 50D and some of the other improvements…(6-7 FPS, that improved AF, improved high ISO, better dynamic range, improved handling, the JPEG/RAW button, 1080 @ 30fps)…all this for about $1100-$1200 USD and I would be first in line!
Reply
Grummbeerbauer Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:47 pm
So you essentially want a 7D for the price of a 50D.
I don’t see that coming.
Reply
NHUSA Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Actually, no…
Canon has a history of the having its next generation of a lower model “leapfrogging” the higher model of the previous generation. The T1i basically got the 15MP sensor from the 50D and the video (sort of) of the 5DMkII, which of course the higher end 50D did not have. The 7D currently has some features the 5D owners would like to have, auto focus for example. So, do I want a 7D for the price of a 50D, not exactly, I just hope that some of that new technology trickles down to camera/price range I am willing to pay for.
Reply
Grummbeerbauer Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 1:36 am
However, your listing of features to trickle down is quite complete. The only headline features of the 7D that you do not mention explicitly you want to have in the 60D is the LCD viewfinder and flash remote commander, and well 1fps or so. I think Canon would know ways to better differentiate the xxDs from the 7D. I do believe that the 60D will get the full video functionality of the 7D, but it will be the usual xxD body (i.e., little if any weather sealing), no fancy LCD in viewfinder, the usual xxD fps. I also doubt that we will see the 7Ds advanced AF. Maybe a 60D will inherit some aspects of the 7Ds AF system, but only in a scaled down version, i.e., less AF points, missing one or two AF-related custom functions etc.
Reply
peter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:06 am
well this would almost be a bargain then…with improved image qualitiy over the 7D…but anyway, I’ll go from my 30D to a 7D follow up body, hoping they don’t exagerate the MP count. I still believe that canon will be able to improve IQ compared to a 60D once a 7D MKII or whatever hits the streets.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 3:32 pm
60D specs is possible, but 100-200/f2 is cow poo, never going to happen.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 4:23 pm
If the new second generation IS is called IS ii then surely all lenses will have that moniker regardless of whether they had IS previously?
Therefore the 24-70 would be IS ii.
Reply
Wombat Reply:
December 29th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
You really don’t know what you are talking about. Take, for example, the new 100mm lens. They replaced the 100mm f/2.8 Macro with the 100mm f/2.8L IS – notice that there’s no II stuck in there? Same thing when they went from 300mm f/2.8L to 300mm f/2.8L IS. Same with the 400mm. Starting to see the pattern?
BTW: there have been several generations of IS, not two. There’s the 2 stop IS, 3 stop IS, 3 stop IS with 2 mode support, 4 stop IS, and so on. Or are you raving about Hybrid IS? That’s not called IS II either.
Why on earth do people think they need IS on a 24-70mm lens, anyway? IS makes sense on long lenses, but not on short ones.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Hm..This sounds too 7D like. The 7D hasn’t even reached the sales it’s supposed to, so I don’ think a 60D will be coming in the first half of 2010.
This is what I think about 60D:
- New, 15 megapixels sensor
- Digic V processor
- ISO 100-6400 (H1:12800, H2:25600)
- 7fps
- Dual CF
- Full HD recording like on the 7D
- Buttons will be placed like on the 7D
It has to be worse than 7D, so no 18 megapixels. And I really hope this is not going to be another – “as much megapixels as possible” camera.
Reply
jo Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:34 pm
this is what I want^^
Reply
gabe Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 5:39 pm
“It has to be worse than 7D” But the difference between your 60d and the 7d is 3mpx and 1fps. Only i see here the paradox?
Reply
backshot especiale Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:24 pm
There will not be a 60d, this is the whole point of the 7d.
Reply
backshot especiale Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:28 pm
To clarify, if you have a 450d/500d you will buy a 7d or 5d mkII what is the point in keeping outdated product range?
Reply
David Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:32 am
Um, the 500D is selling for $618 and the 7D $1699. That a huge price gap, no way they are going to ditch the xxD line, they need a $1200 body.
Reply
Grummbeerbauer Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 6:27 pm
I’d say no Digic V yet, not after they made the 1DIV Digic IV. And definitely no dual CF slots. The 7D should have had them. Same sensor as 7D.
Reply
Enche Tjin Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Looking back to 30D-40D-50D development which is slow and
Canon doen’t want to kill the sales of 7D too,
I think everything will be the same as Canon 50D except
7D’s AF module, body/interface refinement and video mode.
$1100 street price, body only, then the 50D price will be going down to compete with Nikon D90.
Reply
peter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:13 am
@Chio: 15 MP, ISO 100-6400, 12800 H1 25600 H2…if this is the case for a 60D as you dare to guess, then a 7D follow up could likely goes as high as 51200…as a kind of stripped down 1D Mk IV…using 2x Digic V…anyone?
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:27 pm
what if i told you that the next rebel is going to be 18mp? and the 60D would be 18mp too? =)
Reply
Laura Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Then I would say that you are lying and just putting your wishlist here on CanonRumors.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 5:47 pm
The T1i had a similiar size but different sensor than the 50D, and less noise/smear on reds at 1600 iso. I have both. The new 60D –since the 7D isn’t selling all that well–hey, the price is down from 2100 to 1800 and that’s due to slow sales–repeat, the 60D may have slightly better IQ than the 7D without all the fanfare and bells. Bring it. I’m ready.
Reply
Enche Tjin Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 6:35 pm
I think 7D is selling pretty good, at least better than 50D.
Reply
heh Reply:
December 21st, 2009 at 9:21 pm
Well for Canon’s sake the 7D better be selling better than the 50D….
Reply
NC Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:32 am
Since when did the price drop? I’ve never seen the 7d listed for anything other than $1699. If $2100 anywhere, that will be the MSRP … which ime is never the *actual* selling price.
Reply
H Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:56 am
The price is down from 2100 to 1800 not because the sales are “slow” but because all new camera’s drop down in price the first couple of months after they are released…
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:36 am
It’s never been $2100 in the USA. It’s been $1699 the whole time. Jono is smoking crack claiming the 7D isn’t selling well.
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:25 pm
7D sales are good. i can assure you that 60D wouldn’t disappoint. it will be exactly where 50D had been and better!
Reply
Laura Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Man oh man, what a wannabee you are!
Prove it with hard figures and we will speak again.
You’re just talking bullocks, sorry.
Reply
Nick Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 3:12 pm
It’s called Canonrumors, if you want facts 100% of the time maybe you want to look elsewhere…
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 9:03 pm
The 100-200 could be an EF-S…
…but not very likely.
Reply
Freeze_XJ Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:49 am
Why would they be so stupid? For wide lenses, there’s an advantage in EF-S (as you need less glass than for the full EF), but that advantage drops quickly when you go to longer focal lengths, because you need a minimum aperture anyway (for 200 f/2, you _need_ 10 cm wide elements, whatever format you’re shooting). The EF-penalty is neglegible, if it exists at all. (for a 35 mm f/2, you need a bit more than the expected 18 mm elements, because that 18 mm would only cater the exact center of your CCD, leaving nothing but vignetting and disaster for the rest)
Reply
Michal Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:56 am
Yeah, makes perfect sense to create an awesomely huge and expensive lens and minimize its potential market. Obviously that what any prosumer wants, to buy $1k body and $25+k lens.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:40 am
Why are you assuming L lens prices if it’s EF-S? Please provide a detailed actual cost break down of materials and manufacturing before you make such claims. I’ve used my 50D on my 400mm 2.8 L, and I’ll definately be using a 7D on it soon.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 10:28 pm
100-200 F/2 is wishful thinking. And I doubt a pro skilled enough for them to lend a 100-200 f/2 test copy, wouldn’t be the same kind of photographer they would have testing a 60D.
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:22 pm
canon asks professionals to test all sorts of cameras. the appraisal from a pro is always welcomed for marketing value. =)
Reply
Laura Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Too bad for you, that you aren’t among them….
Reply
MT Reply:
December 24th, 2009 at 10:59 am
be nice.
Reply
December 21st, 2009 at 11:58 pm
60D specs not unreasonable…but the lenses is where the poster gave himself away…
Reply
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:32 am
intresting discussion going on…and two more days till the turkey is due ;-)
Reply
backshot especiale Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:00 pm
You should eat something else turkey is for zoom lovers.
Reply
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:00 am
Videos suck on Cameras. i dont even use it anymore..less video dedication should be in the 60d..
18mp
5.2fps
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:41 am
yeah, like they’re gonna make the 60D slower than the 50D, lol
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:23 pm
no worries. 60D is at 6fps. nothing lesser. =)
Reply
Laura Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Which is just what you whish it will be… however no 60D before end of summer. We will speak later about this, watch my word.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:54 pm
as if your name is even laura, lol, what does your word amount to? zip
Reply
RichardR Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 7:07 pm
the 50d is at 6fps?
Reply
backshot especiale Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:59 pm
I only want the 60d as a video camera, with fast primes and I wouldn’t mind a decent fast EFS 24mm equivalent.
Reply
lol Reply:
December 24th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
EF-S is gay like the volleyball scene in topgun.
Reply
Grant Reply:
December 26th, 2009 at 1:47 am
What’s with all the “that’s gay” comments in this thread? Would you use “that’s black” or “that’s Jewish” as a put-down?
Reply
lol Reply:
December 26th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
don’t you watch south park?
Reply
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:21 pm
you really believe that joker? 100-200 f/2? HA…i’m from canon and i know for sure what lenses are coming out. f/2…the things people say here are hilarious. =) do expect the 60D though.
Reply
Laura Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:06 pm
You make me laugh out loud, very loud….
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:08 pm
=) go get a job
Reply
Charles Bronson Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:54 am
You heard it here first, folks. The official word from the janitor of the Canon factory.
Reply
December 22nd, 2009 at 1:51 pm
what about the 24-70 f/1.2… this site is ridiculous. 90% bs.
Reply
David Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:56 pm
hense the site is called canonRUMORS
Reply
December 22nd, 2009 at 5:41 pm
He may have thown in the wild lens #’s to throw u off. 60D in Jan. Prices quoted earlier in Canada.
Reply
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:17 pm
To proshooter: is the rumor about the new 24-70 true?
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Yes, but will be an f/1.4 design with the new Canon HIS.
Oh, and it weighs 15lbs.
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:07 pm
hey that was an imposter!
wad the hell. YES the 24-70 IS is true. nxt year you’ll see it. seems like some ppl here really hates me…esp that Laura. lol…
Reply
ABC Reply:
December 23rd, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Thanks to the real proshooter. I didn’t think the other one was the real deal…obviously the response of a new 24-70 1.4 weighing 15 lbs was meant as a joke.
Do you know about when this new lens will debut? Will it be priced significantly more than the current 24-70?
Reply
proshooter Reply:
December 24th, 2009 at 8:24 am
The neu 24-70 is erly nxt year but will be ef-s only… willl not work on EF mount.. cannon ppl thinks EF is dead it iwill cost $200
Reply
Wombat Reply:
December 29th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Clearly not the real “proshooter”. The real one can at least spell “Canon”, even if some of his/her claims are difficult to believe.
Reply
December 23rd, 2009 at 2:03 am
A 24-70 f2.8L II IS AND A 100-200 f2L IS? That is off the hook.
Reply
December 24th, 2009 at 12:08 am
If the 60D is gonna have video, it better have an external mic support. :)
Reply
December 26th, 2009 at 11:20 am
There could be another difference between the new 60D and the 7D (and from 50D 40D etc)-it will have SDHC memory instead.
Who wants CF memory simply upgrade to 7D !!!
Full HD video also expected on 60D
Reply
Yep Reply:
December 26th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
SDHC should be limited to rebels. 6.3FPS 15-18MP images need faster cards.
Reply
December 26th, 2009 at 11:22 am
I Want Built in..Image Stabilization on the Next Semi-Pro Canon Dslr`s. i am jealous of the Sony a700.(steady Shot)Technology.it has built in Image Stabilizer on the Sensor.
Reply
lol Reply:
December 26th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Then buy a Sony, and be content with the inferior IS
Reply
RichardR Reply:
December 27th, 2009 at 5:13 am
nope..i still love canon.
Reply
January 5th, 2010 at 6:13 pm
I don’t read these things but this article has answered many of my questions. Will there be any more updates to this?
Reply